Final Civ4 expansion (feedback please)

I like the Diplomat specialist! This would be a great mod. Expansion pack might be too ambitious.

The Strategic trait is intruguing as well. Aggressive is kind of limited.
 
New optional gameplay: Regicide mode
You kill the king piece of a civ, the civ collapses into barbarian states. Kings are always last to fall when the city they're in falls, are immune to collateral damage, and have a movement of 2. One for each leader. Optional mode for quicker play.
Man, why didn't they include this in CivIV? This was a pretty cool gameplay mode.


On your excellent diplomat unit idea:

First, I suggest that diplomats be built after writing - makes more sense that way. Second, war weariness should not go up if a treaty is refused, otherwise I can cripple my enemy by triggering high levels of unhappiness.

Other than that, I find this idea actually quite cool and workable!
 
Thanks for all the feedback, only time to address a few specific but every comment is appreciated.

I was wrong about having Diplomats join cities, I meant that certain buildings either gave a diplomat specialist or allowed you to to turn citizens into diplomats. My mistake.
I also thought the GP specialists increased the likelihood of getting that same kind of specialist in that city and produced GP points. If so, then a joined Great Diplomat would give points and increase likelihood of another GD, but if not, then not. They should function like othe great people for blanance' sake.

Maybe instead of Leif Erickson I'd look at giving a civ like the Aztecs another leader: Perhaps a financial leader with diplomacy/spy savvy so there is another way to play Aztecs would be fun if an appropriate historical choice is out there.

I must confess, even if Firaxis does not make another Xpack I'm hoping to learn how to mod well enough to make some of these things happen on their own. Still, I think threads like this hopefully convince Firaxis there is a market for a thought-out Xpack and hopefully they don't let the franchise just sit for 4 years before Civ V comes out.

Oh, and I like the thought of diplomats with writing, and spies with alphabet. Thanks.

I think if you repeatedly refused a treaty there should be some kind of war weariness penalty, obviously more or less depending on your civics. I think if you're beating someone down and they're pleading for you to stop, your citizens ire should be roused. Of course if they're assasinated before reaching your capital then you don't have to worry, do you?
 
I think if you repeatedly refused a treaty there should be some kind of war weariness penalty, obviously more or less depending on your civics. I think if you're beating someone down and they're pleading for you to stop, your citizens ire should be roused. Of course if they're assasinated before reaching your capital then you don't have to worry, do you?
Then I'd have to worry about building spies instead of combat units during my wars. :(
 
There shall be one imaginary civ added in a patch, carrying all the remaining trait combos.

Olympian Empire
UUs: Philistine Axeman, Bulgar Maceman, Polish Rifleman, Canadian Infantry, Cyber Ninja
UB: ?
Leaders
Soren Johnson (Organized, Protective)
Michael Soracoe (Charismatic, Creative)
Caitlin Snaring (Industrious, Philosophical)
 
I personally don't like your trait rebalancing, although Strategic is not a trait that I have thought of...I've been considering something more along the lines of breaking up Financial into a more scientific (Academic) trait and a more money-related (Financial) trait. However, it is quite difficult, given that so many traits have interspersed benefits that make sense for a scientific trait and yet no dedicated trait exists.

It's an interesting set...not quite what I was working with, but still interesting and well-thought out, nonetheless. Not to mention it appears you tried to balance the abilities instead of intentionally making broken combos. I'll commend you for that, as some of the "suggestions" on this board tend to be ridiculous.

As a side note, you may want to change some of the Mongolian leaders to "Strategic" so the Mongolian cavalry can truly be what history shows them to be: awesomely powerful.
 
As a side note, you may want to change some of the Mongolian leaders to "Strategic" so the Mongolian cavalry can truly be what history shows them to be: awesomely powerful.

That makes a lot of sense. I must confess an extreme reluctance to change too many leaders, but obviously I should for historical reasons. Think Kublai would make a great Strategic leader.

I think Imp is a little weak so I like to double some buildings for it. I also think given the added value of Golden Ages, and the fact that civs pumping out units aren't likely to have SE going and lack the ability to GA, so this gives GG another option. Makes Imp a much better trait I thought.
 
My choices for improving Imperialistic are indirect fixes, if possible, then adjusting the trait--my current idea is a combination of both. I've added double production on Monuments (seems like a good fit to me) and increased the stack XP for attaching Warlords to 25 XP from 20 XP as a test. I'll have to redo this after the patch, but I was also thinking of +150% Great General points, just to really beef up that aspect of the trait.
 
Back
Top Bottom